As you are contemplating your different choices don't forget to iron out c-t-c spacing and xover limits vs drive diameter
Beyma Speakers - Beyma 10MCF400Nd closed back carbon fiber midrange speaker with a neodymium magnet - Beyma 10MCF400Nd 400 watt AES 10" speaker for all midrange applications. Beyma 10MCF400Nd sealed midrange and other Beyma 10" speakers here.
Beyma Speakers - Beyma 10MCF400Nd closed back carbon fiber midrange speaker with a neodymium magnet - Beyma 10MCF400Nd 400 watt AES 10" speaker for all midrange applications. Beyma 10MCF400Nd sealed midrange and other Beyma 10" speakers here.
Last edited:
The AE speakers dis arrive and was mounted directly.
Went pretty fast to set the system up for them and defenetely they are satisfying.
The IBHT 18 is soft and nice sounding but maybe a little too wet in its characteristics
The drivers go along very well
Beyma tpl200 is great for the detail over 3000hz
Flexunits is very smoth and nice and makes the voices in the songs very pleasent
AE td15M really cleaned up the lower midrange and provided a fast and accurate bass
Some more tuning..
=)
Went pretty fast to set the system up for them and defenetely they are satisfying.
The IBHT 18 is soft and nice sounding but maybe a little too wet in its characteristics
The drivers go along very well
Beyma tpl200 is great for the detail over 3000hz
Flexunits is very smoth and nice and makes the voices in the songs very pleasent
AE td15M really cleaned up the lower midrange and provided a fast and accurate bass
Some more tuning..
=)
350hz & 3000hz is my points
Still testing alot
right now i let the 15" go all he way down and the infinte baffle 18" up to 60hz
Scott mentioned that a woofer closer to the floor would be nice but how much spacing to the next driver is acceptable?
I might sense some phase issues in the lower frequencies with the speakers and the sub
the volcals is fantastic now and prominent even though i have a layed back frequensy response setup on the dbx
Still testing alot
right now i let the 15" go all he way down and the infinte baffle 18" up to 60hz
Scott mentioned that a woofer closer to the floor would be nice but how much spacing to the next driver is acceptable?
I might sense some phase issues in the lower frequencies with the speakers and the sub
the volcals is fantastic now and prominent even though i have a layed back frequensy response setup on the dbx
The reason that i go all the way down is that i need that much bass
Also i think the IB is just a complement to the speakers
Might change my mind on this
to hi-pass the bass. that is the question.
I guess I am the only one who uses infinite baffle bass, where I low-pass the IB and hi-pass the midbass at the same frequency, via LR24.
I used 60Hz for the longest time, based on the response of the mid-bass extending down to 36 if left on it's own. I have just recently moved up to 72Hz,
and I like it much better. Gives the IB some work to do !
I guess I am the only one who uses infinite baffle bass, where I low-pass the IB and hi-pass the midbass at the same frequency, via LR24.
I used 60Hz for the longest time, based on the response of the mid-bass extending down to 36 if left on it's own. I have just recently moved up to 72Hz,
and I like it much better. Gives the IB some work to do !
Scott
I might end up at 72hz, this is extra noticable in the bass sweeps because they tend to sound irregular when crossed to low.
I fear that one AE IB 18 is not enough though
I might have higher sensitivity once they are fully "played in" so we will see
I really start to like the AE IB 18 for its very soft sound
I might end up at 72hz, this is extra noticable in the bass sweeps because they tend to sound irregular when crossed to low.
I fear that one AE IB 18 is not enough though
I might have higher sensitivity once they are fully "played in" so we will see
I really start to like the AE IB 18 for its very soft sound
Then you don't have any products worth waiting for
. Still, their seeming [lack of] professional customer service practices leaves a lot to be desired and the fact that they apparently don't care, just adds insult to injury. Having been a small time boutique manufacturer, one is always at the mercy of suppliers, so always 'between a rock and a hard place' when it comes to scheduling and why I pretty quickly gave it up on a large enough scale to make it anything more than a way to support a hobby, allowing me to keep a small stockpile of potentially long delivery parts, though of course at a higher piece price.
GM
If you have a steep enough slope and/or higher-order crossover it's largely irrelevant. If you are making a "shallow" lower order design for your crossover freq. then the normally accepted protocol is looking at a 1/4 of the wavelength (as a distance) of the crossover freq. to avoid combing. (..though typically even then combing doesn't occur significantly for an octave + above this range: it's a progressive effect - the higher you go the worse it gets, and by "worse" I mean it display's ever-widening periodic "dips" or "nulls" in freq. response which are actually very difficult to hear if they are very close together and the freq. response was otherwise quite "flat".) Note: this is also relative to the axis, many positions won't display the same level's of combing.
Realistically with a moderate order crossover around 300 Hz you should be good for almost 2 feet distance between woofer and midrange.
If it were me for doing this digitally, I'd be looking at a JMLC crossover w/ offset handled with digital delay:
"Quasi-optimal" crossover for high-efficiency loudspeaker system
Does this also apply to the tweeter and the mid ? One can avoid 1/4 or 1/2 WL spacing with bigger spacing if the crossover is more than second order for illustration ?
That's funny you mention JMLC, I have a close look to it for one month and all the close variation. I didn't understood immediately that one need to offset with precision to find the acoustic center of the lower unit for the upper unit !
here with google translate a page that shows as well crossover variations with quasi transient perfect Xover : filtre "quasi-optimal" : modeles et variantes - Le blog de jimbee
That's funny you mention JMLC, I have a close look to it for one month and all the close variation. I didn't understood immediately that one need to offset with precision to find the acoustic center of the lower unit for the upper unit !
here with google translate a page that shows as well crossover variations with quasi transient perfect Xover : filtre "quasi-optimal" : modeles et variantes - Le blog de jimbee
It's far more important at higher freq.s.. Minor distances at those freq.s can generate audible issues (especially if you didn't start with a "flat" freq. response).
IF you can't get the drivers (tweeter + midrange) really close then the typical solution is to aim the drivers for closer summing further away from the drivers/baffle. This is part of the reason why you'll often see horns tilted/aimed down relative to the rest of the speaker (..the other part is dispersion losses). Still, it is a compromise - not much vertical change and you'll suffer "suck-out" (..a dip in pressure): typical of stand-up/sit-down listening.
IF you can't get the drivers (tweeter + midrange) really close then the typical solution is to aim the drivers for closer summing further away from the drivers/baffle. This is part of the reason why you'll often see horns tilted/aimed down relative to the rest of the speaker (..the other part is dispersion losses). Still, it is a compromise - not much vertical change and you'll suffer "suck-out" (..a dip in pressure): typical of stand-up/sit-down listening.
This is really cool knowledge, i really wish that i could manage the phases in a sensible way soon too see if there is any delay to compensate for.
When we are talking about CTC distance, how about planar drivers such as amt or ribbons?
Those are used in arrays with the argument that the dispersion is limited.
How would i calculate proper distance with planars?
When we are talking about CTC distance, how about planar drivers such as amt or ribbons?
Those are used in arrays with the argument that the dispersion is limited.
How would i calculate proper distance with planars?
I'd think that would have to do with the crossover frequency as to what you can get away with. As the frequency rises, the vertical directivity narrows. Measure near the ribbon and you get a feel for how much. I'd just get as close together as you can with AMT's.
Looking at your pic on the previous page I'd say you can/should get the mid/AMT closer together. Maybe along the line of what the KEF 105 does.
Looking at your pic on the previous page I'd say you can/should get the mid/AMT closer together. Maybe along the line of what the KEF 105 does.
Last edited: